Spare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I probably won't read it but like others will read about it.

The think I'm most interested in is what he says about his dad, particularly regarding his childhood. One of the conflicts between Diana and the royals was that she wanted to have a more normal relationship with her kids, and like, see them everyday and be a part of their lives, and also to be emotionally supportive of them and talk to them. That's not how the royal family normally raises children (it's more common now but was not then). So I'm curious to find out how someone who had one parent who believes in a loving, supportive parent-child relationship and one who was raised by nannies and tutors and rarely saw his parents, who were formal and distant from him.

That's why something like this is interesting to me -- that's a family drama that could be instructive for other people even if most of what being a royal is like has no bearing on my life. But I'm curious how someone like Harry would describe those relationships and that experience.

Diana used them, particularly William, for inappropriate emotional support during the divorce and after. It's a wonder William is as normal as he is. I attribute that to Charles.

You think William is normal?

Yep.

Yikes. Sorry but that guy is nowhere close to normal. What he does have is an army of PR professionals actively working to protect his image. But even with that, the stories about the rages and the cruelty can’t quite get fully hidden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think being part of the royal family would be miserable. I think that the scrutiny the press put him under as a child was abominable. While I think Diana dis the best she could to normalize life for the kids, the troubles between Charles and Diana certainly didn’t help.

He said he wanted out. Great! I think he is entitled to make that decision and it would probably be the healthiest thing for him and his family. However, if he’s out, then he needs to stay out. Maintaining personal relationships is great, but capitalizing on the royal status he rejected isn’t. Airing his version of the family’s dirty laundry for profit is pretty despicable. They either have to wade into the muck and get into a he said/she said type squabble or try to rise above the allegations and either way, it sullies everyone involved, including Harry and Megan who supposedly wanted to leave the drama behind.

He left and seems to be living his own life. He is writing about his childhood, his mom’s death, surviving her, Afghanistan, Chelsy, Meghan etc.
He has a unique experience and perspective, differing from the palace PR machine. That doesn’t negate his experience. Plenty of people will want to read about it. This faux outrage about dirty laundry is pretty entertaining.

Dp. The only thing interesting about him is the fact he was born into the monarchy. Otherwise he is just an ordinary rich dude raising chickens with his actress wife. Why they think they are experts in anything is amazing to me.

I think one interesting thing about him is the roles that the media and paparazzi have played in his life since his birth. Obviously I have no idea if he addresses these in his book, but I’d be quite interested in learning his thoughts about this and how they might have evolved over time and with his experiences.

DP: I’ve never heard him claim to be an “expert” — although since the book is a memoir, that’s not a standard that’s really an issue.

You don't have to say you are an "expert " to give the impression that you think you are the expert. Most people read between the lines

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I probably won't read it but like others will read about it.

The think I'm most interested in is what he says about his dad, particularly regarding his childhood. One of the conflicts between Diana and the royals was that she wanted to have a more normal relationship with her kids, and like, see them everyday and be a part of their lives, and also to be emotionally supportive of them and talk to them. That's not how the royal family normally raises children (it's more common now but was not then). So I'm curious to find out how someone who had one parent who believes in a loving, supportive parent-child relationship and one who was raised by nannies and tutors and rarely saw his parents, who were formal and distant from him.

That's why something like this is interesting to me -- that's a family drama that could be instructive for other people even if most of what being a royal is like has no bearing on my life. But I'm curious how someone like Harry would describe those relationships and that experience.

Diana used them, particularly William, for inappropriate emotional support during the divorce and after. It's a wonder William is as normal as he is. I attribute that to Charles.

You think William is normal?

Yeah, can't endorse that. I think William has handled his super weird life and it's bizarre expectations fairly well, but that is a reflection of how *not* normal he is, actually. I think Harry's responses are much more normal and reflect a person with a more typical (and healthy) sense of personal boundaries and limits

It makes me think of when my brother got divorced and everyone went on and on about how my niece "handled it well" because she accepted it immediately and never cried or got upset with her parents or struggled with how it changed her life. And my nephew was said to be "taking it poorly" because he cried and got mad at his parents and had lots of questions and struggled with it. But of course they each handled it as well as anyone could expect them to and there was absolutely nothing wrong with my nephew's behavior, and in fact it was probably healthy for him to express his feelings more openly and to express frustration and anger with how the choices of others would upend his life. My niece was easier to deal with through that process and made it really easy for her parents, so she was praised, but I'm not convinced that these traits will benefit her for the rest of her life as she's mostly learned to internalize all her feelings and that she will get rewarded for accommodating other people's feelings instead.

Everyone is "normal" and no one is wrong in their response to trauma, but the idea that people who are not expressive and never negative in the face of traumatic experiences are better or more "typical" is false. It's just that when we see someone having an emotional or vulnerable reaction to trauma, it stresses US out and therefore we reject it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I probably won't read it but like others will read about it.

The think I'm most interested in is what he says about his dad, particularly regarding his childhood. One of the conflicts between Diana and the royals was that she wanted to have a more normal relationship with her kids, and like, see them everyday and be a part of their lives, and also to be emotionally supportive of them and talk to them. That's not how the royal family normally raises children (it's more common now but was not then). So I'm curious to find out how someone who had one parent who believes in a loving, supportive parent-child relationship and one who was raised by nannies and tutors and rarely saw his parents, who were formal and distant from him.

That's why something like this is interesting to me -- that's a family drama that could be instructive for other people even if most of what being a royal is like has no bearing on my life. But I'm curious how someone like Harry would describe those relationships and that experience.

Diana used them, particularly William, for inappropriate emotional support during the divorce and after. It's a wonder William is as normal as he is. I attribute that to Charles.

I attribute any normalcy William may have to the Middleton family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I probably won't read it but like others will read about it.

The think I'm most interested in is what he says about his dad, particularly regarding his childhood. One of the conflicts between Diana and the royals was that she wanted to have a more normal relationship with her kids, and like, see them everyday and be a part of their lives, and also to be emotionally supportive of them and talk to them. That's not how the royal family normally raises children (it's more common now but was not then). So I'm curious to find out how someone who had one parent who believes in a loving, supportive parent-child relationship and one who was raised by nannies and tutors and rarely saw his parents, who were formal and distant from him.

That's why something like this is interesting to me -- that's a family drama that could be instructive for other people even if most of what being a royal is like has no bearing on my life. But I'm curious how someone like Harry would describe those relationships and that experience.

Diana used them, particularly William, for inappropriate emotional support during the divorce and after. It's a wonder William is as normal as he is. I attribute that to Charles.

You think William is normal?

Yeah, can't endorse that. I think William has handled his super weird life and it's bizarre expectations fairly well, but that is a reflection of how *not* normal he is, actually. I think Harry's responses are much more normal and reflect a person with a more typical (and healthy) sense of personal boundaries and limits

It makes me think of when my brother got divorced and everyone went on and on about how my niece "handled it well" because she accepted it immediately and never cried or got upset with her parents or struggled with how it changed her life. And my nephew was said to be "taking it poorly" because he cried and got mad at his parents and had lots of questions and struggled with it. But of course they each handled it as well as anyone could expect them to and there was absolutely nothing wrong with my nephew's behavior, and in fact it was probably healthy for him to express his feelings more openly and to express frustration and anger with how the choices of others would upend his life. My niece was easier to deal with through that process and made it really easy for her parents, so she was praised, but I'm not convinced that these traits will benefit her for the rest of her life as she's mostly learned to internalize all her feelings and that she will get rewarded for accommodating other people's feelings instead.

Everyone is "normal" and no one is wrong in their response to trauma, but the idea that people who are not expressive and never negative in the face of traumatic experiences are better or more "typical" is false. It's just that when we see someone having an emotional or vulnerable reaction to trauma, it stresses US out and therefore we reject it.

I think William has a very good understanding of how "not normal" his life is, and so knows how to live his not normal life in the most bearable way possible.

I think the same of Kate. She chose to live a life I would never want -- and she does what is required of that life very well. Good for her for going in with her eyes wide open, and executing the responsibilities of that job.

[Anonymous]

William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I probably won't read it but like others will read about it.

The think I'm most interested in is what he says about his dad, particularly regarding his childhood. One of the conflicts between Diana and the royals was that she wanted to have a more normal relationship with her kids, and like, see them everyday and be a part of their lives, and also to be emotionally supportive of them and talk to them. That's not how the royal family normally raises children (it's more common now but was not then). So I'm curious to find out how someone who had one parent who believes in a loving, supportive parent-child relationship and one who was raised by nannies and tutors and rarely saw his parents, who were formal and distant from him.

That's why something like this is interesting to me -- that's a family drama that could be instructive for other people even if most of what being a royal is like has no bearing on my life. But I'm curious how someone like Harry would describe those relationships and that experience.

Diana used them, particularly William, for inappropriate emotional support during the divorce and after. It's a wonder William is as normal as he is. I attribute that to Charles.

You think William is normal?

Yeah, can't endorse that. I think William has handled his super weird life and it's bizarre expectations fairly well, but that is a reflection of how *not* normal he is, actually. I think Harry's responses are much more normal and reflect a person with a more typical (and healthy) sense of personal boundaries and limits

It makes me think of when my brother got divorced and everyone went on and on about how my niece "handled it well" because she accepted it immediately and never cried or got upset with her parents or struggled with how it changed her life. And my nephew was said to be "taking it poorly" because he cried and got mad at his parents and had lots of questions and struggled with it. But of course they each handled it as well as anyone could expect them to and there was absolutely nothing wrong with my nephew's behavior, and in fact it was probably healthy for him to express his feelings more openly and to express frustration and anger with how the choices of others would upend his life. My niece was easier to deal with through that process and made it really easy for her parents, so she was praised, but I'm not convinced that these traits will benefit her for the rest of her life as she's mostly learned to internalize all her feelings and that she will get rewarded for accommodating other people's feelings instead.

Everyone is "normal" and no one is wrong in their response to trauma, but the idea that people who are not expressive and never negative in the face of traumatic experiences are better or more "typical" is false. It's just that when we see someone having an emotional or vulnerable reaction to trauma, it stresses US out and therefore we reject it.

I think William has a very good understanding of how "not normal" his life is, and so knows how to live his not normal life in the most bearable way possible.

I think the same of Kate. She chose to live a life I would never want -- and she does what is required of that life very well. Good for her for going in with her eyes wide open, and executing the responsibilities of that job.

But it's unfair to compare either of them to Harry. William has had a clear role and goal since he was born. It might not be one I would want at all, but never underestimate the value in feeling like your life has purpose. I think the main reason William has bought in much more heavily to the BRF's weirdness and tolerated it with more grace is that he is crystal clear on his position within it. He's also had a guideline in his father in terms of how to be an heir in waiting and how to occupy your time with charitable work and devotion to family. It's a super weird, undesirably life but I do think that they've figured out what you need to do to endure until you take the throne and actually get to fulfill your life's purpose. There are worse things.

But Harry has had to deal with all the weirdness without any of the purpose or clear cut role. He can't model his life after his father's because his life will never resemble his father's in the way William's does. he also can't do what his mother did because unlike Diana, Harry was born into the family. And I think it's been harder for him to look to other family members. Edward or Andrew would the obvious choices but Andrew is terrible and Edward has never had to deal with the level of press scrutiny that Harry has had since he was a child (the benefits of being born a generation earlier when the press was more hands-off, plus being the youngest of four). Anne's role could potentially have served as a model but Anne is unique -- her temperament is so close to her mothers, stoic and dutiful. Harry is like his mother, more emotional and questioning. I can't imagine Harry playing the Anne role.

I know it's unpopular because these people are rich and spoiled, but when I think about Harry's position in the world, I have empathy. Or maybe pity. I think he was given a fairly impossible set of circumstances and actually hasn't done half bad -- he really embraced military service and he appears to really want to do good in the world even if his attempts are hamfisted at best. I wouldn't trade places with him.

And separately: Kate is unique in that family because she 100% chose to step into her weird role and seems to really embrace it. She wasn't born into it but she clearly shaped herself for it, and I think one reason it feels like she never sets a foot wrong is that unlike most of the other people in that family, she does what she does not out of kind of exhausted sense of duty but because she thinks it's cool. She loves wearing those coat dresses and matching bags and playing benefactor and being studiously opaque but in a gently, affirming way. Of course she's good at it. It was her choice and it was just right for her. Also, like William, her role is much more clearly defined as the wife the heir. The expectations on her are extremely well outlined, something Diana resented and Kate seems to adore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

You really like to talk about his rages lol. But I'm media literate so am able to separate fact from fiction (for both couples). Loved reading several articles about William "flying into a rage" over a Paparazzi stalking him just to watch the video to see a concerned father upset at someone for following around his wife and children and taking pictures. If this is an example of one of his "rages", it's fully justified.

Both brothers are obviously traumatized from what happened with their parents and the death of their mother. I don't think either of them are as evil or as perfect as some sects of the media make them out to be. I'm interested to hear what Harry has to say while taking many things with a grain of salt just as I take any glowing media coverage of either of them with a grain of salt. They're both very privileged humans who both make use of PR to shape the narrative. Obviously. They're public figures and if they weren't using PR they'd be idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

No idea about that but his public persona has always struck me as alarmingly tightly wound. Same with Kate. I always feel a little uncomfortable around people who control their emotions that tightly. All people have feelings and my experience is that the more you suppress them, the more dangerous they are when they finally surface. So I would not be surprised to discover that either of them have mental health issues that could manifest via anger. It's very common for highly repressive personalities. My mom was raised by a very strict Catholic family and she is perfectly behaved and has all the "right" feelings 99% of the time and the 1% of the time is absolutely terrifying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

You really like to talk about his rages lol. But I'm media literate so am able to separate fact from fiction (for both couples). Loved reading several articles about William "flying into a rage" over a Paparazzi stalking him just to watch the video to see a concerned father upset at someone for following around his wife and children and taking pictures. If this is an example of one of his "rages", it's fully justified.

Both brothers are obviously traumatized from what happened with their parents and the death of their mother. I don't think either of them are as evil or as perfect as some sects of the media make them out to be. I'm interested to hear what Harry has to say while taking many things with a grain of salt just as I take any glowing media coverage of either of them with a grain of salt. They're both very privileged humans who both make use of PR to shape the narrative. Obviously. They're public figures and if they weren't using PR they'd be idiots.

Okay Jan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

You really like to talk about his rages lol. But I'm media literate so am able to separate fact from fiction (for both couples). Loved reading several articles about William "flying into a rage" over a Paparazzi stalking him just to watch the video to see a concerned father upset at someone for following around his wife and children and taking pictures. If this is an example of one of his "rages", it's fully justified.

Both brothers are obviously traumatized from what happened with their parents and the death of their mother. I don't think either of them are as evil or as perfect as some sects of the media make them out to be. I'm interested to hear what Harry has to say while taking many things with a grain of salt just as I take any glowing media coverage of either of them with a grain of salt. They're both very privileged humans who both make use of PR to shape the narrative. Obviously. They're public figures and if they weren't using PR they'd be idiots.

Okay Jan.

[Anonymous]

No, I won’t be reading it, listening to his wife’s podcast, or watching their curated reality show/documentary. I have no respect for someone who is selling out their family to be wealthy and famous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll read it - the library copy but that’s true of almost all my reading these days, I only buy books that come highly recommended and aren’t available by inter library loan. Then I usually donate the book with the request that they add it to the collection for others to enjoy.

Many of us have the painful experience of being the less favored child. Some of us have the very painful experience of being the scapegoat in a dysfunctional narcissistic family model. But I can’t imagine the experience of being the spare to the heir of a monarchy. For all the folks who glamorize monarchy, it seems to me to be a terrible life - no room to breathe, to make mistakes, to just be. All the money in the world does not outweigh mental health, and there is little in the way that Royal children are raised that is conducive to positive mental health even before you add in the parental dysfunction and particular tragedies endured by Wills and Harry. I feel sorry for both of them.

Harry used to be the favorite.

+1. Sad that he has taken a back seat to his ambitious wife. Someday she’ll kick him to the curb like everyone else in her life except her mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think being part of the royal family would be miserable. I think that the scrutiny the press put him under as a child was abominable. While I think Diana dis the best she could to normalize life for the kids, the troubles between Charles and Diana certainly didn’t help.

He said he wanted out. Great! I think he is entitled to make that decision and it would probably be the healthiest thing for him and his family. However, if he’s out, then he needs to stay out. Maintaining personal relationships is great, but capitalizing on the royal status he rejected isn’t. Airing his version of the family’s dirty laundry for profit is pretty despicable. They either have to wade into the muck and get into a he said/she said type squabble or try to rise above the allegations and either way, it sullies everyone involved, including Harry and Megan who supposedly wanted to leave the drama behind.

He left and seems to be living his own life. He is writing about his childhood, his mom’s death, surviving her, Afghanistan, Chelsy, Meghan etc.
He has a unique experience and perspective, differing from the palace PR machine. That doesn’t negate his experience. Plenty of people will want to read about it. This faux outrage about dirty laundry is pretty entertaining.

Dp. The only thing interesting about him is the fact he was born into the monarchy. Otherwise he is just an ordinary rich dude raising chickens with his actress wife. Why they think they are experts in anything is amazing to me.

I think one interesting thing about him is the roles that the media and paparazzi have played in his life since his birth. Obviously I have no idea if he addresses these in his book, but I’d be quite interested in learning his thoughts about this and how they might have evolved over time and with his experiences.

DP: I’ve never heard him claim to be an “expert” — although since the book is a memoir, that’s not a standard that’s really an issue.

You don't have to say you are an "expert " to give the impression that you think you are the expert. Most people read between the lines

Many people also jump to conclusions— often false ones, based on their own, highly personal biases. When you start ascribing characteristics to others bolstered only by your ability to supposedly “read between the lines” that’s likely to suggest much more about you than it does about the person about whom you’re flinging your own, idiosyncratic “impressions “.
The more stuff like this I read, the more I get why Harry felt the need to do this book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William is consistently rumored to have severe rages.

No idea about that but his public persona has always struck me as alarmingly tightly wound. Same with Kate. I always feel a little uncomfortable around people who control their emotions that tightly. All people have feelings and my experience is that the more you suppress them, the more dangerous they are when they finally surface. So I would not be surprised to discover that either of them have mental health issues that could manifest via anger. It's very common for highly repressive personalities. My mom was raised by a very strict Catholic family and she is perfectly behaved and has all the "right" feelings 99% of the time and the 1% of the time is absolutely terrifying.